1. The Devil’s Advocate Workshop as a Vehicle for Self-Analysis: The Case of ERP Adoption Friday 6 th April, 2007 IFIP 8.3 Task Force Meeting David Sammon dsammon@afis.ucc.ie Session 3: Methods and Tools for Supporting Decision Making

2. Context – what am I trying to say….in 45 minutes Hindsight versus Foresight Organisational Readiness = Awareness + Preparedness Awareness is Foresight –awareness of what? In this context – CSFs for ERP implementation Preparedness comes from Awareness Lack of Awareness results in retrospective explanation (sense-making) of less than desirable outcomes – using the term Hindsight Hindsight is very costly……. –Sometimes requires additional investment to retrofit implemented ERP system

3. Hindsight in Practice….. I abandoned my PhD in October 2006 and in January 2007 I defended my work….. In hindsight I would have done things differently regarding the way I conducted the research A greater awareness (foresight) would have been hugely beneficial at the outset of the research project My state of readiness was low From a PhD research case –“the level of organisational readiness for such a large-scale implementation, was seriously underestimated. For instance, the Business Unit, in particular, was not ready to embrace this new technology”

4. Is FORESIGHT Possible? Managers may be able to use the benefit of foresight as opposed to hindsight –This has not been a major defining characteristic of previous organisational approaches to implementing ERP packages This suggestion of foresight would somewhat counteract the need to use hindsight with regard to decision-makers retrospectively making sense of the outcomes of their actions, which were informed by their decisions The ‘best defence is always awareness’ Hammond et al. (2006, p.126) –“Forewarned is forearmed. ….you can build tests and disciplines into your decision-making process that can uncover errors in thinking before they become errors in judgment.” Allowing a decision-maker the opportunity to retrospectively make sense of their proposed future decisions, using a Devil’s Advocate Workshop, would indeed embrace this concept of foresight (Hammond et al., 2006) and should ensure a more mindful (Swanson and Ramiller, 2004) approach to enterprise- wide ERP projects

5. existence of actual strategic business need prioritised business requirements definitive project scope specific project goals and objectives allocation of best internal business resources effective communication accurate project timeframe accurate project costing top management commitment and support THE PLAN THE CHANGE THE FIT THE PLAN THE FIT THE ACTORS THE CHANGE THE FIT required system functionality OUTCOMES Categorised Functionality Project Management SuccessAcceptance of Change ownership of the project THE ACTORS required organisational buy-in Causal Activity Model of CSFs for Enterprise-Wide ERP Project Implementations

6. existence of actual strategic business need prioritised business requirements definitive project scope specific project goals and objectives allocation of best internal business resources effective communication accurate project timeframe accurate project costing top management commitment and support THE PLAN THE CHANGE THE FIT THE PLAN THE FIT THE ACTORS THE CHANGE THE FIT required system functionality OUTCOMES Categorised Functionality Project Management SuccessAcceptance of Change ownership of the project THE ACTORS required organisational buy-in “in hindsight the project lacked a set of clear and consistent (universally understood) strategic business objectives and the criticality of adoption was not communicated from the top level” “relatively inexperienced employees were involved in the project as Business Unit representatives, and while their knowledge and understanding of existing business processes was immature, they were still required to process and understand new business process transactions in a new technological environment. The Business Support Manager speculated that “failure to manage change in this respect prevented end-user ownership being transferred from the project team to the Business Unit users” Causal Activity Model of CSFs for Enterprise-Wide ERP Project Implementations

7. Devil’s Advocate Workshop embraces the…. Dialetical Method Sense-Making Models of Decision Making –Thinking First textbook description of decision making – operationalises the normative vision of the intelligence phase –Seeing First actions may be driven by what is seen as by what is thought –Doing First doing various things, seeing what works, making sense of that and then repeating that behaviour while disgarding the rest The Devil’s Advocate Workshop provides: –the setting for the proposed method of assessing organisational readiness –an environment which may present managers with opportunities for improvisations for example, identifying the skills required to execute the project, and therefore, ensuring that these skills exist

8. An Extended Model of Decision Making for a Mindful Approach to IT Innovations (Enterprise- Wide ERP Project Implementations) sense- making project preparations planning phase of chosen implementation methodology Framework of Understanding Retrospective Analysis of Preparedness Project Initiation Intelligence Phase Design/Choice Phase Required Organisational Readiness Devil’s Advocate Workshop

9. The merit of the Devil’s Advocate Workshop is that in embracing the dialectical processes, the focus of workshop participants is on disagreements which are turned into agreements, or indeed there is a transformation in the dialogue in that direction –As a result, from this dialectic between opposing views a greater understanding of the CSFs for ERP implementation can emerge with a pooling of information in pursuit of better decision-making –Managers will be able to identify their state of organisational readiness for their enterprise-wide ERP project, emerging from their improved awareness of the causality between CSFs for ERP implementation and the impact of CSFs on desired project outcomes; improving their collective awareness and strengthening their preparedness for the project Devil’s Advocate Workshop ….

10. There is real value-added in the Devil’s Advocate Workshop, especially in relation to enterprise-wide ERP projects –Given how complex and resource intensive ERP projects are and given the prohibitive cost of incorrect action, or indeed safe inaction producing incorrect outcomes, implementing organisations cannot afford to get it wrong –Therefore, the positioning of the devil’s advocate workshop in a pre-planning environment, prior to project initiation, promotes a more inexpensive setting for the experimentation that doing first requires Devil’s Advocate Workshop ….

11. Questions? Friday 6 th April, 2007 IFIP 8.3 Task Force Meeting David Sammon dsammon@afis.ucc.ie Session 3: Methods and Tools for Supporting Decision Making